Related Stories

“How long would you stay if your council said they wouldn’t abide by the policies in place?” questioned Wahta Mohawk community member Tim Thompson, saying the protest is set to continue for an undetermined amount of time.

The group shut down access to the community administration building the morning of May 6 in protest of what they say is a lack of transparency by members of council.

“It’s about the ownership the community feels,” explained Thompson. “You can’t make arbitrary decisions without consulting the community.”

According to Thompson, as soon as the current council, consisting of four councillors and chief Philip Franks, was in place following an election in March, they raised their daily honorarium to more than double the former amount and rejected the Administration Code and Financial Code developed with community input over the course of the past two years.

He said many decisions are being made without consulting the community and many residents are worried about the continuation of community programs now that council has taken over the administration building.

“They already announced the closure of the (Mohawk) language program and removed the daycare to set up an office,” said Thompson.

Attempts to contact Chief Franks for comment were unsuccessful.

In an open letter posted on the band website, Thompson, Wahta councillor Stuart Lane and David Stock are listed as the instigators of a letter-writing campaign to staff, council and political organizations defaming the character and actions of the chief and council.

The unsigned document reads, “Council has been subjected to a concerted attack by a small group of members intended to interrupt its work and that of the administration…. ”

Although they say they weren’t involved in the planning of the demonstration, Thompson and Lane attended in support of the group.

Lane is the only current member of council who served under the former chief, who was forced to resign by his council in 2011. Lawyers for the band council stated on their website, “council had, through application of the Wahta Mohawk Election Rules and Regulations, declared the position of chief as vacant due to the chief’s failure to properly participate in the First Nations governance initiative.”

After the chief was ousted, his supporters attempted to have the four members of council, including Lane, removed and the chief reinstated in a lawsuit that was resolved in favour of the four former council members last fall. As part of the resolution from the lawsuit, the former chief and his supporters were compelled to acknowledge council’s conduct in declaring the position of chief as vacant was proper and correct, as well as accept that there was no basis to remove council. The chief’s seat remained vacant until the election in March of this year.

Lane said the current council is divided by conflict.

“It’s a little bit hostile,” he said. “They seem to want everyone to take sides.”

According to the band website, the Wahta Mohawk territory has a population of about 175 people and a membership of approximately 710 members.

Lane said there are no plans to back down.

“We will be here until council says they’re ready to start discussing,” he said.

|

(5) Comment

By only the truth|MAY 11, 2014 08:18 PM

DO A BACKROUND CHECK ON HIM IF YOU THINK WHAT IM SAYING IS WRONG !! IF YOU CANT GET ONE DONE ON HIM GOOGLE HIM , HE WENT TO JAIL FOR IT ..Some may say he did the time he shouldn't have to live the crime BULLSHIT there was only 2 children that could and would come forward in court , the others and the women were too scared!! He will never do the time for the crime that sick individual has done and the fact that hes getting any media coverage at all is sicking and makes the banner look horrible , like I said BIRD OF A FEATHER FLOCK TOGETHER!!

Apparently, this disdain extends to the entire democratic process. Their candidates (including Tim Thompson who is quoted in this article) were pummeled in the election but seem to be unwilling to accede to the real "will of the people". This is sour grapes at its worst.

Oh, and the New Council has only been in place since March. Isn't this an awfully short time to accuse someone of a "lack of transparency"?
As for the lawsuit, the old Council did not WIN the decision as they say. Our side decided to settle on order to ensure that an election was actually held. The issue wasn't the questionable ouster of the Chief, but the refusal by them to resign when presented with a petition to do so. Wahta election rules state that, if Council is presented with a petition signed by 50% +1 of people who voted in the last election, they must resign. Old Council decided that this rule (which they instituted) didn't apply to them.

The "policies" in place that the new Council will "not abide by" are highly objectionable ones that were rammed through by the old regime at small meetings. Their governing style consisted of small (roughly 20 of their supporters) gatherings where they would hold a vote and declare it "the will of the people". It was this sort of cabalistic maneuvering that resulted in their being ousted in a land slide last March.
As for a "lack of transparency" by the new Council, they are not ones to talk. The old Council hired a "consultant" and paid him $5000 a month, provided him with free housing (displacing a Wahta member to do so), all without any defined role. When the new Council discovered this, he was immediately relieved of his duties.

Wow, what a load of crap.
The "protesters" are simply a group comprised of supporters of the old Council that was resoundingly voted out in the last election and the article is full of half truths and outright lies.
For example:
The day care that the new COuncuil is supposed to have evicted hasn't been operating for thirteen years;
The language classes have only been suspended until the Fall when they will be relocated to a new cultural centre at the old school in the centre of the community;